Iphone users who say Flash is dying, or useless, or crappy software...

[nateo200]

people who get mad at people for saying iTouch are also sour grapes.

Not really. I think its the gayest name possible for an electronic device and sounds like someone is saying "I touch *Insert inappropriate word*". It also is a way for people to try and make the iPod touch sound as cool as the iPhone. Its also not the official word. Yes I get mad over it because it sounds ridiculous....

 

[kylos]

When did I ask "developers to abandon existing technologies when there isn't a suitable replacement?" I was talking about something that an end user could do to hasten the deployment of HTML 5. I don't expect developers to abandon Flash if Flash is the best tool for the job. Sometimes it is, which is why I use the two flash blocking plugins I mentioned. One click and I can see the content.

It is definitely not the best tool for displaying video. It's only advantage is its ubiquity. What are the other main uses for Flash? Games? Most are not geared towards a touch screen anyway. Ads? Flash or HTML 5 makes no difference. Block them either way. Interactive menus? Already possible through existing web standards.

And then we have legitimate uses for Flash, such as your panoramas. Even you would have to admit that it's a pretty fringe use. Sucks for you that it's not supported on the iPhone, but it's not a problem I have come across as a user of mobile Safari. The 3 or 4 times that I have come across Flash content that I have wanted to display and couldn't in the two years that I have had an iPod touch could have been done in current web standards.

I'm not trying to say my use case fits everybody. I'm just responding to the OP as to why I personally do not demand that the iPhone OS support flash. It's not sour grapes or fanboyism. I've been blocking flash since before the iPhone, because it's often misused and a detriment to an open web.

Like you, I can't stand seeing flash used where a bit of semantic html and css (with perhaps a smidge of js) would do. I just think it's a bit over the top if the reason to not include flash on the iphone is due to some preference for HTML5. This makes it unnecessarily difficult for web developers who have legitimate uses for flash for truly interactive purposes.


detox, as I noted previously flash is actually more standard than the "standards".

The past isn't the future isn't the present. Right now, standards compliance is a huge deal. In terms of consistency. I think we'll always find at least some minor issue or gripe. Fact is, it's better for CONSUMERS to have open technology. It means we aren't tied to one company. Do you think web browsers would be as advanced as they are now without Firefox putting up a fight against IE? Could Firefox have even remotely come close to beating IE in the first place had it not been for the fact that anyone could download it and have it work with their websites? That's standards compliance at its best.

Standards compliance has improved greatly, but it's still a major pain to develop cross-platform. You just have to learn to stay away from some of the most useful features of a standard because of incomplete support (minwidth, minheight, fixed positioning!!!). But, in my case, you're preaching to the choir. I love standards and try to use open technology as much as possible. But, in some cases, plugins and proprietary technology are the better solution.

Also, I think WHATWG has been wasting time with the Ogg Vorbis issue. You can't force mass adoption of open standards. Just work on one issue at a time: getting out a solid HTML standard that will be widely adopted. That alone would save me much grief in developing sites.

 

[BaldiMac]

Like you, I can't stand seeing flash used where a bit of semantic html and css (with perhaps a smidge of js) would do. I just think it's a bit over the top if the reason to not include flash on the iphone is due to some preference for HTML5. This makes it unnecessarily difficult for web developers who have legitimate uses for flash for truly interactive purposes.

Like I said in an earlier post, I don't think the reason Apple doesn't include Flash has anything to do with HTML 5. I think HTML 5 is just the fall back plan. My guess is that Apple doesn't include Flash because (1) it can be used to run applications and (2) they believe it is not a good enough experience on the iPhone.

However, I support the non-inclusion of Flash because of the privacy, security, stability, and misuse issues that I brought up before.

 

[firewood]

I stated that those who are saying no flash for iPhone is a good thing are really just rationalizing the reason a huge amount of web content isn't available to them.

Doesn't matter.

The iPhone sells as well or better than phones which do (attempt to) support Flash. And, according to web analytics and surveys, iPhone users use their devices on the web even more than any other competing device, and would purchase the same device again if needed by a higher percentage than the competition.

Until people start buying competing devices instead or iPhones, and use them as much as iPhones for web and apps, there's no business reason to move to supporting Flash. Apple's already got your money. That's what the bean counters want.

If you think you can do better and make more money than Apple, start your own company, and become a billionaire like Jobs.

 

[NightFox]

Doesn't matter.

The iPhone sells as well or better than phones which do (attempt to) support Flash. And, according to web analytics and surveys, iPhone users use their devices on the web even more than any other competing device, and would purchase the same device again if needed by a higher percentage than the competition.

Until people start buying competing devices instead or iPhones, and use them as much as iPhones for web and apps, there's no business reason to move to supporting Flash. Apple's already got your money. That's what the bean counters want.

If you think you can do better and make more money than Apple, start your own company, and become a billionaire like Jobs.

That was a nicely reasoned and interesting post until you spoiled it with the rather unnecessary final paragraph.

 

[Slip Jigs]

Flash is tool that adds to the bloating of browser size, slows the viewer experience by over-using system resources, and actually inhibits design. If a website has a purpose other that pure entertainment then relying on a non-standard browser plug-in just shows poor planning and a lack of vision.

Yeah... I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there on that one. The problem with your argument and some of those from both sides of the issue is there are no absolutes here. I do agree that Flash HAS been and is still being misused a lot, which most likely leads to your perception. But still, there are plenty of examples that point to the contrary.

Here's one example - it's not pure entertainment and it actually facilitates the user experience and it's anything but poor planning and lack of vision. And, at least for now, it cannot be delivered in anything but Flash.

http://www.bkdsn.com/bkdesign_studio.html

 

[NightFox]

Here's one example - it's not pure entertainment and it actually facilitates the user experience and it's anything but poor planning and lack of vision. And, at least for now, it cannot be delivered in anything but Flash.

http://www.bkdsn.com/bkdesign_studio.html

Just tried to look at that site on my iPhone. D'oh!

 

[crisg]

Doesn't matter.

The iPhone sells as well or better than phones which do (attempt to) support Flash. And, according to web analytics and surveys, iPhone users use their devices on the web even more than any other competing device, and would purchase the same device again if needed by a higher percentage than the competition.

Until people start buying competing devices instead or iPhones, and use them as much as iPhones for web and apps, there's no business reason to move to supporting Flash. Apple's already got your money. That's what the bean counters want.

If you think you can do better and make more money than Apple, start your own company, and become a billionaire like Jobs.

Again, I run into this attitude; the Apple Shill mentality.

It doesn't matter how well I lay out my argument or how much sense it makes because in the end, I'll always be told what I want is irrelevant to Apple as it already has my money and that its way ahead of the competition.
I, certainly, could not possibly matter less to Apple, as I am one lonely
Iphone customer.

Its the same mentality you hear if you support a 3rd party candidate (you're throwing away your vote! if you don't like it, start your own country or go live in China!). I cannot make a change, as I am one lonely voter.

My response is that... any and all change begins at the root level. This thread leads me to believe there are people who are as tired as I am that
a lot of their websites aren't supported by their favorite device.
I for one will not simply go along with it.

If apple doesn't respond by the time my contract is up, I won't renew my contract or purchase whatever iPhone generation is current at that time.

And let me do you a favor and respond for you; I'll save you some time.

you: "well buddy, there's the door! don't let it hit you on your way out!"

 

[firewood]

Every product will have happy and unhappy customers, even the best ones. A company is doing well as long as the ratio is large enough.

 

[charliehustle]

Every product will have happy and unhappy customers, even the best ones. A company is doing well as long as the ratio is large enough.

I have a love and hate relationship with apple..

I love their product, but I hate how good they are at running their business.

I doubt anyone here actually thinks a company like apple who's market cap is just under $200 Billion did not have the resources to put cut and paste, landscape typing, a video recorder, and all of the stuff we've wanted that apple has slowly trickled out..

obviously they are able to do it, but they want to hold off so they force people to buy their next model...

they give you a good product, but they always leave you wanting more by leaving something that they could have easily put on the phone..
and as much as i hate it, thats the reason I'm going to buy a new iphone each year it comes out..
like even if there are other phones (for the sake of the argument) that are as good as the iphone, as soon as apple puts ichat on the iphone, I'm sold..

it's good business though, so I can't hate..

 

[kdarling]

The iPhone sells as well or better than phones which do (attempt to) support Flash.

We won't know until full Flash 10 comes out, which is far more useful than the current FlashLite phones.

That's when we can tell if it matters to users or not.

PS. Check out Flash at 3:40 in the video in this article about the new Nokia:

http://www.intomobile.com/2009/10/09/hands-on-the-nokia-n900-at-ctia-fall-2009.html

 

[Slip Jigs]

Just tried to look at that site on my iPhone. D'oh!

Of course not. It's a Flash site. And even if the iPhone did support Flash, it probably wouldn't be the best device to view this particular site.

I was commenting on the sub-topic issue of Flash in the web world at large, not just Flash in the iPhone web browsing world.

 

[FCDP]

I'm sure some people have seen this, and I believe it was posted on the main page, but on Monday during the Adobe MAX Keynote (I was attending), they announced Flash player 10.1, which is all about optimizations. Here's a video from the keynote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pee3nT4bPw4

Pretty much everyone is teaming up with Adobe to optimize Flash for their devices, except Apple. The fact is, that Flash on the iPhone gives developers a way to make RIAs that are just as powerful as native apps, but don't have to conform to Apples app store guidelines, and Adobe has already found a work-around, of being able to generate iPhone IPA files with Flash CS5, and the new Flex Mobile Framework.

Everyone is right to complain about Flash and it's performance, but the fact is, what Adobe demoed in performance at MAX this year shows they've been working to drastically change it. Not included in that short youtube video is that they've also managed to lower memory usage of Flash by 50% without developer intervention, as well as demoing optimizations in battery performance. Flash 10.1 even has a low power usage mode that will run the SWF at a forced lower performance to allow for even less battery usage.

Before Monday, I agreed with everyone here, it wasn't practical to have Flash on the iPhone, or any mobile device, but 10.1 just changed that.

 

[BaldiMac]

I doubt anyone here actually thinks a company like apple who's market cap is just under $200 Billion did not have the resources to put cut and paste, landscape typing, a video recorder, and all of the stuff we've wanted that apple has slowly trickled out..

obviously they are able to do it, but they want to hold off so they force people to buy their next model...

The assumption you have made in this scenario is that throwing money at a problem always leads to a good solution. From what I have read about the way Apple operates, their philosophy is not just to hire a bunch of new engineers and throw them at a project. I seriously doubt their programmers were just sitting around twiddling their thumbs instead of implementing the features you claim they withhold to "force" people to buy upgrades.

They decide which features make the most sense to implement and then dedicate all of their resources to do so. Cut and paste is a good example. People expected Apple to "just implement it." It's not that easy. Look at the Palm Pre, their implementation of cut and paste is easily inferior to the iPhone. Once you release it, any change is going to lead to resistance from developers and users. It's one of those thing that you have to get right the first time. Especially on something like the iPhone, where the number of gestures you can use to interact with the content is extremely limited. Touch and hold can't be used for anything else now in the same context.

 

[OriginalFormula]

Of course it was. It was on Youtube after all. What's your point?

Did you watch the video though? Are you just interested in Flash because it's Flash, or are you interested in the content it's presenting?

The content it's presenting. Of course the medium has problems, but any given medium will at some point have problems.

I don't think anyone is saying that flash is perfect. But as it stands, flash is widely used. Until the transition is made from flash to HTML 5, flash support would be nice.

 

[Consultant]

Again, I run into this attitude; the Apple Shill mentality.

It doesn't matter how well I lay out my argument or how much sense it makes because in the end, I'll always be told what I want is irrelevant to Apple as it already has my money and that its way ahead of the competition.
I, certainly, could not possibly matter less to Apple, as I am one lonely
Iphone customer.

Its the same mentality you hear if you support a 3rd party candidate (you're throwing away your vote! if you don't like it, start your own country or go live in China!). I cannot make a change, as I am one lonely voter.

My response is that... any and all change begins at the root level. This thread leads me to believe there are people who are as tired as I am that
a lot of their websites aren't supported by their favorite device.
I for one will not simply go along with it.

If apple doesn't respond by the time my contract is up, I won't renew my contract or purchase whatever iPhone generation is current at that time.

And let me do you a favor and respond for you; I'll save you some time.

you: "well buddy, there's the door! don't let it hit you on your way out!"

Let's see. Few lonely persons want iPhone to have floppy drives. Those lonely people have minimal impact on overall satisfaction. Wow, what a surprise.

iPhone still leads in user satisfaction
http://obamapacman.com/2009/10/stud...ction-for-consumer-business-smartphone-users/

Any web developers who believe Flash is a "standard" don't know what they are talking about. It is a plug in and is dependent on users having the plug-in. The fact that most browsers include a version pre-installed does not qualify it as a standard.

Flash is tool that adds to the bloating of browser size, slows the viewer experience by over-using system resources, and actually inhibits design. If a website has a purpose other that pure entertainment then relying on a non-standard browser plug-in just shows poor planning and a lack of vision.

My personal opinions on Flash aside, the writing is on the wall, with the increasing percentage of users accessing the internet on netbooks and smartphones, and even MIDs it is clear that the way people are getting this information is changing and delivering your message/commerce in a bloated resource hogging manner is short sighted. In the near future the majority of internet users will not be sitting at home in front of a ridiculously over-specced desktop or laptop but will be using low power/mobile devices....get with the program.

Lastly, any developer with any sense of UI design will throw in a quick flash detection script and provide their content in an alternate format...anything less is just inexcusable...

Exactly, plus most flash contents are worthless for search engines. (and flash is most commonly used for annoying ads, which many people are blocking with flash blockers).

 

[Konz]

Any web developers who believe Flash is a "standard" don't know what they are talking about. It is a plug in and is dependent on users having the plug-in. The fact that most browsers include a version pre-installed does not qualify it as a standard.

Flash is tool that adds to the bloating of browser size, slows the viewer experience by over-using system resources, and actually inhibits design. If a website has a purpose other that pure entertainment then relying on a non-standard browser plug-in just shows poor planning and a lack of vision.

My personal opinions on Flash aside, the writing is on the wall, with the increasing percentage of users accessing the internet on netbooks and smartphones, and even MIDs it is clear that the way people are getting this information is changing and delivering your message/commerce in a bloated resource hogging manner is short sighted. In the near future the majority of internet users will not be sitting at home in front of a ridiculously over-specced desktop or laptop but will be using low power/mobile devices....get with the program.

Lastly, any developer with any sense of UI design will throw in a quick flash detection script and provide their content in an alternate format...anything less is just inexcusable...

/thread

 

[darngooddesign]

...

 

[jason221]

Wow, insightful rant.

Flash is dying, and I'm happy. HTML5 will replace it, and not suck.

How exactly do you propose that HTML5 will replace Flash on websites like Hulu or YouTube and their Flash video interfaces?

I'm not saying that Flash is good, just that HTML5 is not an alternative. Plus, HTML is a markup language, not a plugin. You need plugins like Flash or Quicktime to make videos work.

 

[IronLogik]

How exactly do you propose that HTML5 will replace Flash on websites like Hulu or YouTube and their Flash video interfaces?

I'm not saying that Flash is good, just that HTML5 is not an alternative. Plus, HTML is a markup language, not a plugin. You need plugins like Flash or Quicktime to make videos work.

HTML 5 has it's own video tag. It supports direct video links within the code and has it's own interface for displaying and playing it. It doesn't need flash to do so.

 

[jason221]

HTML 5 has it's own video tag. It supports direct video links within the code and has it's own interface for displaying and playing it. It doesn't need flash to do so.

Ah, well, my experience is with HTML 4 and XHTML. I stopped developing and designing websites only a couple years ago, and my knowledge is already outdated...

 

[Scooterman1]

Look at how long it took Apple to figure out how to make Copy, Cut, & Paste work. And you expect them to figure out how to get Flash to work before another couple of years?

 

[firewood]

Will Flash die quickly? Doubtful. But I expect it will be like analog TV. Some people will buy converter boxes and keep the ole toxic power-wasting tube around for awhile.

There will be a temporary business opportunity for a web service that allows you to view crufty old flash sites without actually running a flash plug-in.